About your Search

20121202
20121210
Search Results 0 to 11 of about 12
such as social security and medicare, 65%. 64% creating jobs, 64% improving public education, growing the economy, creating a business environment that allows for innovation. lowering the federal deficit actually false down to 40. not as much confidence there as a part on the other side. we been said the training faces a number of challenges including but not limited to large budget deficits, national debt, slower economic recovery, high unemployment, deep political divide on many issues. do you believe we will overcome these challenges in the foreseeable future as we've done in the past, or do you think these are unique set of challenges that are so serious that we might not be able to overcome those challenges? two-thirds of voters, 67%, say we will be able to do that. 31% have concerns about it. look at the bars across the bottom. the ones like younger voters, 18-29, confident we'll get there. african-american voters, 85%. hispanics 66. and those are the fundamentals of the democratic party, 85% of democrats saying it will improve. in which of the following closest to coming to think the presi
't be sound and solvent for future generations. for example, medicare's hospital services program is in serious financial trouble. in a report this spring, the medicare trustees cautioned that the trust fund that covers the program's hospital services will be depleted and consequently insolvent by 2024. the fact is, we can accomplish entitlement reform in a way that doesn't change programs for people at or near retirement yet ensures that those programs will be there for our children and grandchildren down the road when they need them. republicans and democrats should be able to come together, as should older and younger americans, because thoughtful entitlement reform is in everybody's interest. and, finally, we need to control our spending. our federal deficit for the fiscal year 2012 was $1.1 trillion, and our national debt is now more than $16 trillion. that is unsustainable. more revenues from tax reform and economic growth combined with entitlement reform and controlling spending will reduce our deficit and our debt, and there is no question that we can do it. for example, w
than any single thing of medicare and medicaid and longer-term social security, so the mere fact that we are discussing those types of things fit. in terms of the votes, look, if it's going to be a deal there has to be votes from both sides. the reality is -- and these guys, the president and the speaker dealt with one another before. they've never been able to come to a deal. they came to a huge deal during the lame-duck session in 2010 on extending the bush tax cuts. they came to another deal without shutting down the government in april of 2011 cutting discretionary spending by billions of dollars and they came to another one on the debt ceiling as well which was a 2.2 trillion dollar long-term reduction in exchange for an increase in the debt ceiling. so, you know, the need to take it to another level. this is a more complex problem, and it's the beginning of a series of negotiations between the two. they are going to be together for the next four years. the president won the election, the republicans won the house and frankly are not likely to lose the election in the second
, which everybody knows we've got to do if we're going to keep medicare going. i don't think anybody in this body doesn't know that within ten years it will be broke unless we make the appropriate structural reforms now. the president continues to call for a balanced approach to deficit reduction, but in practice he's offering up all tax increases and no spending discipline. he has offered up nothing meaningful on entitlement reform. the proposal put forward last week by secretary geithner was embarrassing. i happen to like secretary geithner. i stood up for him under some trying circumstances on the finance committee before he was approved by the senate. and i did it because i believe he's a hard worker. i believe he's an intelligent man. and i personally like him. but my gosh, if i was the treasury secretary and the president gave me that plan to go up and show it to the leader of the house, the speaker of the house, i would have said, no, mr. president, you can't do this. this is an insult. if the president said you've got to do this for me, i would say, i think it's better for me
on issues like raising the eligibility age, the colas for social security, means testing, medicare for more influence -- affluent recipients >> first let me just say that we would support absolutely a balanced approach. it's important to point out as senator warner did that we have done over a trillion dollars in cuts over the next 10 years which the president is committed to keeping. with respect to medicare, we do have a very different approach. there's no doubt we have to bring down the health care costs growth. the differences we believe we should expand on the kind of reforms that we need in the affordable care acts. where we see $716 billion in savings, not simply across-the-board but by changing the incentive structure, the way we pay providers so we focus on the value of care rather than the volume of care. i do think it's ironic that we have gone in the last four weeks with many of our republican colleagues criticizing the president for having done too much savings on medicare, $716 billion am in their presidential candidate propose putting that money back and. in other words addin
be conceptualized and dealing with medicare premium reimbursement issues -- what is the one singular issue that you're focusing on as far as the top 2%? [talking over each other] >> what is remarkable about this, and this was said on the sunday shows, in this day, in 2012, how-to people are aware of what was a issue that happened in september. the unemployment rate, while it has come down, is still higher when george w. bush extended it. .. now he has also said he is not wedded to every detail of his plan, that he will compromise and he looks forward to concrete proposal that addressed the question of revenue for sale. they are open to revenue. the fate of the raise tax rates on the wealthiest americans. it's mathematically impossible to receive targets necessary or balance in a way that only closes loopholes and tax deductions. both economically -- >> that's been your earlier point. >> depending on the proposal you're talking about. it is either possible to do it if you stick it to them about class and race taxes on the middle class you can tax the wealthiest americans from having to contribute mo
now. stakes couldn't be higher. more than $7 trillion of tax cuts in medicare payments and programs for unemployed will expire in just 27 days am today. adding to these spending cuts and tax increases or sequestration, cuts of almost 10% of both defense and nondefense, and cuts of 2% medicare. it would be hard to find a single american not affected by these changes. you all know how serious this is. you believe, like me, that we can do it. to prevent fiscal crisis. but the answer is not just extend all of these tax cuts and delight all of these cuts. that is not the answer. this is an opportunity, an opportunity to commit to balance plan, to bring our national debt back down to sustainable levels. the united states, i believe come is at a critical juncture. we can come together, show the world we are still responsible actors. we can prove that america is still the leader of a global economy. people are watching. do we still have it. or, we can let a instruction is an and stagnation turn this country that we all love so much into a second place state. i spent a few days last fall mee
to categorize the current income as long-term capital gains and there's a medicare fraud. i don't think people -- the of the hugely supportive of bipartisan efforts and they said recently, you know, the republican colleagues i don't think that we have a vested in a major way in that kind of what it means to go through tax reform discussion. we really get down to the details because i know it's going to be painless and you have to go through that debate because of the end of the day there are many that say let's go to brazil as opposed to hear cutting and then get them back and that would be a valid exercise. >> don't tax you, don't tax me coming and you will find that out. estimate on the second piece and then on the second piece. the first piece, the danger with putting the goals in the savings and cuttings and taxes in its regular order i'm afraid the regular order won't produce the results. to build another fiscal what on pressure which puts us right back where we are or have a default mechanism which the policy set aside that was sides don't like about media is a lot of bad alternatives fo
the medicare guarantee for our seniors and the next generation? well, those big questions were discussed, argued and clear positions were taken, and voters went to polling places on election day to render their verdict. and, mr. president, the outcome was clear. candidates who stood up for the middle class won. candidates who advocated for our seniors came out ahead. and in exit polls across the country, voters made very clear that they strongly supported the idea that the wealthy should pay higher tax rates and their fair share. and everyone -- democrat, republican, independent, wealthy, low income, middle class, students, workers, retirees, older, younger and inbetween -- everyone, everyone supports extending the tax cuts for the middle class. nobody thinks that the taxes should go up for 98% of our workers and 97% of our small business owners. so, mr. president, this ought to be easy. the american people just weighed in supporting a continuation of the bush tax cuts for the middle class. it's a policy democrats and republicans agree on. and it would cushion millions of middle-class fa
to our debt problem. believe it or not, republicans who voted to turn medicare into a voucher program in the name of deficit reduction, support adding to the deficit with high-end tax cuts. in rhode island at least, those are lousy priorities when it comes to deficit reduction. we should let the tax cuts at the top expire for reasons also of fairness. loopholes and special provisions allow many super high income earners to pay lower tax rates than many middle-class families. according to the nonpartisan congressional research service, 65% of individuals earning a million dollars or more annually pay taxes at a lower rate than median income taxpayers making $100,000 or less. 65%, nearly two-thirds, of individuals earning over a million dollars a year actually pay a lower tax rate than median income taxpayers do. that is a tax system that has turned upside-down and needs to be fixed. earlier this year, a majority of senators voted to advance my "paying a fair share act," the buffett rule bill to ensure that multimillionaire earners pay at least a 30% effective federal tax ray. the rate
of reimbursement to providers under the medicare program. unless we repeal that law, we will have to once again patch the law as we have done for many years now with a so-called medicare doc fix, and i think the time has come to go ahead and repeal the law. the fifth item i wanted to just mention is that congress needs to give the president the power to raise the debt ceiling. at the same time, congress should retain congress' right to disapprove of that increase, but secretary geithner has made a proposal to the congress which i believe makes good sense. it is based upon the arrangement that was agreed to that senator mcconnell had put forward in the 2011 debt ceiling crisis that we all lived through. obviously, this is a significant to-do list, and i don't intend to speak about all these items. i would like to focus my remarks on the need for congress to pass the extenders package of tax provisions. i feel this has gotten too little attention. it deserves to be dealt with as a major component of the reaction or the response to the so-called fiscal cliff. this is in fact the family and busines
of the middle class, it voids our promise to seniors with steep cuts to social security and medicare, all to pay for even more handouts to the rich. at least we now know where they stand. republicans have sought to cover by invok invoking erskine bowle' name. he has disavowed their plan. we're glad to see the republicans join in the negotiating process. while their proposal may be serious, it's also a nonstarter. they know any agreement that raises taxes on the middle class in order to protect more unnecessary giveaways to the top 2% is doomed from the start. it won't pass. democrats won't agree to it. president obama wouldn't sign such a bill. a understanand the american peot support it. that's in all the polls in the press this morning. the american people are tired of budget-busting giveway is to ths to the wealthiest 2%. the american people want a balanced deal. it must be higher taxes on the richest of the rich. republicans would be wise to keep that in mind as negotiations move forward. we're willing to compromise but we also will not consign the middle class to higher tax bills twill mill
Search Results 0 to 11 of about 12

Terms of Use (10 Mar 2001)